Who is your God of the old testament?
Who Is this Jesus what does he stand for?
Is the God of old testament and new the same God?
Why such a contrast between God of old testament and Jesus of the new testament?
I am searching for some answers. 0887
I don’t find that God resides inside the Bible, neither do I find him to be defined or constrained by it; the Bible is a set of documents written by, and about people who were interacting with God (or trying to) - we can learn from their findings and mistakes.
Mangetout, perhaps 0887 is just wanting information on the God in the bible. Not your personal beliefs.
Old Tesitment - “an eye for an eye”
New Testiment - “turn the other cheek”
some people think that jesus’ message was different from the one given in the old testiment (more forgiving and less vengeful), because he spent some of his undocumented years studying with budhist monks. regardless of the reason, the messages from the old to new testiment change.
My God is Tom Leykis.
My impression (from scant references in other threads) is that 0887 is some kind of conservative Christian (or at least has that kind of background/upbringing) and (from the fact that this thread originated in IMHO and was moved) that this thread is intended to explore the validity of the Bible, in view of the apparently widely diverse portrayals of God therein.
But that’s just my impression; perhaps 0887 could clarify further.
In any case, it’s pretty hard for anyone to avoid imposing personal beliefs on the Bible - that’s exactly what causes these debates in the first place.
In my view (and yes, that’s an opinion) the problem is caused by the base assumption/expectation that the Bible is an integral, infallible, entirely self-consistent document. Building on that as an axiom, it is necessary to develop quite complex explanations of why, for example, the OT description of God was big on smiting and acquisition of territory, whereas the NT God was big on love and personal responsibility.
Why do we need (or why is it necessary) to approach the Bible in this manner?
Jesus is God’s son.
He is the second member of the trinity.
This is indeed an historic day, for Vanilla has apparently discovered proof of the existence of God and the nature of the Trinity.
Oh, excuse me, I should have said IMHO , for those who couldn’t have known that already.
Well sorry I didn’t get back before now.
My job wouldn’t let me.
I actually at this point is doubting God and I don’t like how it makes me feel.
I need proof the God of the old and the new testament are the same.
If they are the same then why the contrast in behaviour?
Just like that was said in another post An eye for an eye, Was this from God or violence of those days?
Now it is turn the cheek and forgive 70 times 7 why the big change?
I am truly wondering where this is coming from is the bible the inspired word of God like it says or is that from man?
I am not a child searching I have always believed but skepitical? I am in my forties so this is no childish question in my oppinion.
I am just thinking a higher power may be the answer. 0887
I was thinking along these lines just last night.
It occurred to me that if God exists within time as we perceive time, then there was a change between the O.T. and the N.T. and perhaps Koran as well.
But…
If god exists outside of time as we know it, then there is no change, god experiences all our time in a similar way to an artist experiencing a canvas.
Perhaps God paints one side in dark colours, another in lighter shades. God hasn’t changed, simply he/she has made the universe in a way that is to his/her wishes?
Cheers, Keithy
Well, if the bible truly is The Word of God then there is a problem with God in the O.T. and God in the N.T.
[IMHO] The bible was written by men, who were inspired by God but still meer humans. The bible is a history of man’s understanding of God. In the beginning God walked in the Garden and Adam and Eve were able to hide from him. By the time the N.T. came along man’s image of God had changed considerably (however that view of God has remained the same for 2000 years). I must point out that the idea that God was a mean old man in the O.T. is not entirely true. When the Israelites went into the “Promised Land”, they said God told them to kill and plunder. In my mind they were passing the buck trying to justify what they had done to innocent people. I’m sure everyone has heard of the 23rd Psalm. Well there are many, many verses like that in the O.T.
The idea of Jesus studying Buddist theology is nothing more than conjecture. However, Jesus did study the O.T. and what he says and does in the N.T. is based on his knowledge of the O.T.
I believe there is only one (1) God, so it follows that He is the same God for Christains, Jews, Buddists, Muslims…your God and my God. [/IMHO]
That is an interesting out look Kniz.
I am not convinced but interesting never the less.
I believe one God but not everyone serves the one true God. I am not up to questions though because I am not truly convinced of any Gods at this point. 0887
The main reason why the old and new testaments differ is the fact that they were written by man. Of course, these men felt they had a connection with God/Jesus, but they were still men.
The Christian bible is more likely to have been distorted over time. The Jewish Torah was written in Hebrew and has not been translated and re-translated over the years (at least not as much as the New Testament).
Reasons why the New Testament may be inaccurate:
It was written by men long after the time of Jesus. The stories had been passed down at least a few generations orally. This alone highly increases the probability that the stories were altered over time, and people’s personal biases added in. Ever played the game ‘Telephone’? Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I seem to remember that at least one of the books of the bible was written after 400 AD (not quite first hand IMHO).
When the bible was compiled, many books were also left out. Again, more human opinions and biases came into play.
Here’s a good example: skip forward a millenium or so, the church starts charging for sins. The church removed reincarnation completely from the bible. It is present in the Old Testament, most prominantly in the Kaballah.
Now take this work - written well after the time of Jesus, compiled and edited, re-edited over and over - and translate it from it’s original text, to another language, then to another, and then to another (someone feel free to fill in the languages if you know). Do you think maybe the message got a little messed up through the many translations? There’s all kinds of discussions over the original meanings of some of the words. I seem to remember debates over the untranslated original word for ‘virgin’ also meaning innocent or young. Wow, what difference one word could make!
Now take all that, and add in the fact the Jesus spoke always in allegory. Nothing was clear-cut form the beginning - always open to interpretation.
And you wonder why the Old and New Testament don’t agree word for word, huh?
As far as a partial answer to your post. Is the god the same of Old and New? Of course. As is Ram, Krishna, Buddah, Mohammed, and Zoroaster. How could the majority of the world be worshiping a false god? Would your god allow that?
<< Old Tesitment - “an eye for an eye” >>
This is a grotesque, but common, misquote. The context is that justice must be appropriate, “measure for measure”, the penalty cannot be excessive compared to the crime. If a criminal intentionally puts out your eye, you cannot ask for the death penalty. If someone steals from you, he must make good what he stole, you cannot chop off his hands for it (as one could under Hammurabi’s code and under the Qu’ran.) The point is that vengeance is NOT part of justice. It was a great stride forward in law.
Alas, it is often twisted out of context to imply that vengeance IS part of justice.
<< New Testiment - “turn the other cheek” >> is just unrealistic.
I agree, but not what you think.
YHWH in the OT was much, much worse than just “an eye for an eye.” He was completely and absolutely barbaric, wanting human sacrifices (or at least burnt offerings), directed Israelis on genocides, harden the Pharoh’s heart so He could do nasty things to the poor sod and his country, and so fortth.
Yes I just go by what I read and it seems barbaric to me.
Surely this is not the God I would like to believe.
this is supposed to turn us toward the God of the old testament?
0887
0887, you are searching for GOD. wanting proof that God exists.
i take it you are christian.
the core of chritianity is faith. the sheer BELIEF and FAITH in GOD.
If GOD was to knock at our doors, introduce himself and show us PROOF that he is GOD, then FAITH could not exist.
the mystery and unknowing about GOD forces us to take a leap to FAITH.
Without FAITH God would be no more than science or a dictator.
**
Please provide a cite that God wanted human sacrifices in the Bible. (And please don’t mention Jeptach’s daughter. God never said he wanted her for a sacrifice; and don’t mention Isaac either, as the Bible clearly says it was a test).
He hardened Pharoh’s heart to restore his free will, not take it away.
If I came over to you and said “Give me a hundred bucks,” you’d be free to say yes or no. However, suppose you said no and then I hit you and repeat my demand. You again say no, so I continue to beat up on you, and after each blow repeat my demand. At some point you’re going to give in and give me the money, but it could hardly be said to be a free will decision.
God, however, restored Pharoh’s ability to make a free will decision regardless of the hammering he was taking from the plauges. Pharoh was, in the end, free to free the Israelites at any time. He simply chose not to.
Zev Steinhardt